Negative Pressure Wound Therapy vs Conventional Wound Treatment in Subcutaneous Abdominal Wound Healing Impairment The SAWHI Randomized Clinical Trial

IMPORTANCE Negative pressure wound therapy (NPWT) is an established treatment option, but there is no evidence of benefit for subcutaneous abdominal wound healing impairment (SAWHI). OBJECTIVE To evaluate the effectiveness and safety of NPWT for SAWHI after surgery in clinical practice. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS The multicenter, multinational, observer-blinded, randomized clinical SAWHI study enrolled patients between August 2, 2011, and January 31, 2018. The last follow-up date was June 11, 2018. The trial included 34 abdominal surgical departments of hospitals in Germany, Belgium, and the Netherlands, and 539 consecutive, compliant adult patients with SAWHI after surgery without fascia dehiscence were randomly assigned to the treatment arms in a 1:1 ratio stratified by study site and wound size using a centralized web-based tool. A total of 507 study participants (NPWT, 256; CWT, 251) were assessed for the primary end point in the modified intention-to-treat (ITT) population. INTERVENTIONS Negative pressure wound therapy and conventional wound treatment (CWT). MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES The primary outcome was time until wound closure (delayed primary closure or by secondary intention) within 42 days. Safety analysis comprised the adverse events (AEs). Secondary outcomes included wound closure rate, quality of life (SF-36), pain, and patient satisfaction. RESULTS Of the 507 study participants included in the modified ITT population, 287 were men (56.6%) (NPWT, 155 [60.5%] and CWT, 132 [52.6%)) and 220 were women (43.4%) (NPWT, 101[39.5%) and CWT 119 [47.4%)). The median (IQR) age of the participants was 66 (18) years in the NPWT arm and 66 (20) years in the CWT arm. Mean time to wound closure was significantly shorter in the NPWT arm (36.1days) than in the CWT arm (39.1days) (difference, 3.0 days; 95% CI 1.6-4.4; P < .001). Wound closure rate within 42 days was significantly higher with NPWT (35.9%) than with CWT (21.5%) (difference, 14.4%; 95% CI, 6.6%-22.2%; P < .001). In the therapy-compliant population, excluding study participants with unauthorized treatment changes (NPWT, 22; CWT, 50), the risk for wound-related AEs was higher in the NPWT arm (risk ratio, 1.51; 95% CI, 0.99-2.35). CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE Negative pressure wound therapy is an effective treatment option for SAWHI after surgery; however, it causes more wound-related AEs.